[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 52 (Wednesday, May 1, 2002)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3582-S3583]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
THE COST OF HIGHER EDUCATION
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, every weekend that any of us go home, the
families we run into are talking about the cost of higher education. We
know that cost is going up. But this administration has just made an
unconscionable recommendation for low- and middle-income families--to
deny them the opportunity to consolidate the loans they have now at a
fixed interest rate. That possibility is there for small business, it
is there for big business, and this administration wants to foreclose
that opportunity for families and new college graduates across this
nation.
This is what it is going to mean for the average student loan
borrower in America: It is going to mean an additional $3,000 in costs
on a $10,000 student loan. At a difficult and challenging time when
state budgets are cutting their aid to higher education, and tuition is
on the rise, it is bad education policy, and it is not in our national
interest. We should be doing everything in our power to make college
more affordable.
I see the Senator from Vermont. I yield to him.
Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, I agree with the Senator from
Massachusetts. I could not believe what I heard today with respect to
what they are trying to do. This administration is taking a look at
education from the bottom up. It is ridiculous what they are doing.
This is a perfect example of doing something that is so against
anybody's rational way of helping people; I could not believe it.
Mr. KENNEDY. I see the Senator from Washington.
Ms. CANTWELL. I thank the Senator from Massachusetts for bringing up
this issue. It is so critical in my home State of Washington, where the
University of Washington is looking at increases of 11 to 12 percent.
Students are spending between $60,000 and $70,000 for their education.
We need to do everything we can in this information age economy, where
education is going to determine success; we need to be increasing
access. The elimination of a Federal fixed-rate student loan program is
a big mistake. We should be increasing Pell grants. We should be
increasing access to education. We should be making it more affordable.
As somebody who went to school on Pell grants and student loans, I
think it is a difficult challenge. In this day and age, with our
economy changing, access to education for low- and middle-income
students at the most affordable rate must be a priority of this
administration and this Congress.
Mr. KENNEDY. I yield to the Senator from New York.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Procedurally, Senators may seek recognition,
but there is no standing order for the Senator to yield.
Mr. KENNEDY. Do I have 10 minutes?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has 10 minutes. The Senator may
yield to another Senator for a question.
Mrs. CLINTON. Will the Senator from Massachusetts yield for a
question?
Mr. KENNEDY. I yield for a question.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New York.
Mrs. CLINTON. Is the Senator aware of the amount of money that the
average American family already pays for college tuition and education,
which as my colleague from the State of Washington pointed out is
actually increasing faster than the rate of inflation?
Mr. KENNEDY. I certainly am. Nationwide, college tuition have
increased 35 percent over the last 10 years. Today, the average student
leaves college with $17,000 of debt. In my State, the average loan that
was consolidated last year was $27,000. Under the administration's
proposal, students will lose the opportunity to consolidate their loans
at a fixed rate and that would cost the average student thousands of
dollars as the interest rate goes up from year to year.
Mrs. CLINTON. From the Senator's study of this proposal, which I have
to confess, when I first saw it, I thought it was a misprint--I could
not believe the administration was about to make the cost of going to
college more expensive for middle-income families--is the Senator aware
of the impact this alleged cost savings would have on the entire
Federal budget? What is the amount of money the administration thinks
they will save on the backs of young people going to college?
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, $1.3 billion. This is a shell game. They
will use the $1.3 billion they will get from students for the tax
break. And we are talking about 6 million students who would be facing
higher interest rates over the next decade. In my own state last year
36,000 people consolidated their FFEL loans--with an average loan of
$30,000. That means that a variable interest rate could cost as much as
half a million dollars to students in Massachusetts.
Mrs. CLINTON. In one State alone, is that the Senator's information?
Mr. KENNEDY. One State alone; that is right.
Mrs. CLINTON. I thank the Senator for bringing this very important
issue to the attention of this body and to families throughout New York
and America. Like so many, we were just amazed by this proposal. I
certainly hope cooler and more compassionate heads will prevail on the
other end of Pennsylvania Avenue.
Mr. KENNEDY. I see my friend and colleague from Massachusetts.
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senator
from Massachusetts be permitted to control his time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is recognized to speak in morning
business for up to 10 minutes. The Senator may only yield for
questions.
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I simply ask my colleague from
Massachusetts--and I thank him for bringing this issue before us--
whether or not he believes, in a moment when people are being thrown
out of work, in a moment when the economy is down, and at the same time
we are talking about making education the most important issue for
Americans, as Americans believe it is--if at that moment it makes any
sense at all, when more people are trying to apply to schools, when
more people realize the importance of education to get a high-value-
added job to move the economy of this country--how can one justify, I
ask my colleague, asking students in this country to pay the price of a
large number of corporations getting a tax break, of a large number of
wealthy people getting a tax break, and making it more difficult for
people to secure the very education the President says and others agree
is the most important ingredient in not only moving our economy but of
good citizenship?
I ask my colleague, is there any possible way to justify that as a
commonsense policy?
Mr. KENNEDY. The Senator has put his finger on it. This is a shell
game. The moneys that effectively will be saved will be used for the
tax break, the tax cut for the wealthiest individuals. It is wrong
education policy. It is wrong national security policy.
American families need lower tuition rates rather than higher loan
interest rates. That is what the Democrats stand for, and it is
intolerable--intolerable--that the Bush administration would go through
this subterfuge. The last time we faced it was in 1981 with the
addition of an origination fee. That was a fee on all loan programs.
That means that a student has to pay an additional 3 percent on what
they have to borrow. Now students not only have to pay for tuition and
fees, but the federal government added a 3 percent fee of their own to
those already high costs.
This administration does not get it straight when it comes to
educating the young people in this country.
I thank the Senator.
Mr. KERRY. I thank my colleague.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, how much time remains?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Three minutes 26 seconds.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I conclude by pointing out, once again,
that 64 percent of all students borrow through the Federal student loan
programs to finance an education; 74 percent of full-time students work
25 hours a week or more while attending school, and nearly half of all
these students work at levels that are likely to have a negative impact
on their academic achievement and the overall quality of their
education.
There is tremendous pressure on students now. If we tolerate this and
let
[[Page S3583]]
the administration's program go forward, it will mean additional
pressure on these young people, and in the long run a deficit to the
quality of education in this country.
I yield the remaining time to the Senator from Minnesota.
Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, how much time do I have?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The Senator from Minnesota has 2\1/2\ minutes.
Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, does the Senator from New Jersey want
to speak as well on this subject?
Mr. TORRICELLI. I will be happy to if the Senator has time.
Mr. WELLSTONE. I will yield to the Senator from New Jersey.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Mr. WELLSTONE. I ask unanimous consent that I be able to follow
Senator McCain in the order, speaking later, for 10 minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.
____________________